The king said in his February First royal proclamation that he had to take over and declare a state of emergency to restore peace and strengthen democracy. Three months later, is the country closer to this goal? The answer doesn't look positive.

The gap between the king and the political parties has widened since February First. This is unfortunate for peace and democracy and was created by the king seizing power and declaring a state of emergency. A way out of this situation would be to lift the state of emergency, an agreement between the parties and the king over the choice of prime minister and the release of all political prisoners.

Internationally and especially in the eyes of democratic nations, the country has become a pariah state. It is clear that half a dozen advisers are telling the king that he can ride out this international criticism by ignoring it. But even they must be aware of the international ramifications of this isolation and that their advice is harmful for the long-term future of the country and for constitutional monarchy. But they are giving it anyway.

By using emergency provisions, the royal commission is pushing legal boundaries for politically-motivated character assassination. On the other hand, bringing in ex-panchays into the governance structure has introduced unaccountability and sycophancy back into the system. An end to this three-month political exercise will restore a program-based system that can take us towards resolution. Since the king has taken all power in his hands, it is up to him to take this step.